Town of Carlisle
MASSACHUSETTS 01741
------------
Office of
PLANNING BOARD
66 Westford Street
Carlisle, Massachusetts 01741
Tel. (978) 369-9702
Fax (978) 369-4521
Minutes
November 7, 2011
Minutes 9/26/11
Bills
Budget; FY13 budget
Special Town Meeting – 11/8/11
December meeting schedule
Proposed Planning Board policy on noise control associated with land development construction
Chair David Freedman called the meeting to order at 7:45 pm in the Heald Room of Town Hall. Members Michael Epstein, Tom Lane, Jonathan Stevens, Nathan Brown, Marc Lamere and Planning Administrator George Mansfield were present. Member Jeff Johnson was absent. Mosquito reporter Bob Zielinski was also in attendance. PB Administrative Assistant Gretchen Caywood was absent.
Minutes
The PB reviewed the draft Minutes from 9/26/11. Stevens moved to approve the Minutes as drafted, Lamere seconded and the motion was approved 3-0-3, Lane, Lamere and Brown abstaining. It was noted that Lamere and Brown had not been in attendance on 9/26/11, and Lane had not had the opportunity to review the Minutes due to non-delivery of his pre-meeting information packet.
At 7:47 pm, Chair Freedman recessed the PB meeting briefly in order that members could attend part of the ZBA meeting. At 8:07 pm, Chair Freedman resumed the PB meeting (same attendees).
Special Town Meeting – 11/8/11
Chair Freedman reminded the PB of the Special Town Meeting at 7 pm Tuesday to vote on whether or not to approve a borrowing authorization for the Concord-Carlisle Regional High School Building Project.
FY13 budget
Planning Administrator Mansfield had circulated a memo from FinCom concerning the FY2013 budget in which they are requesting that each department prepare a budget presuming a 0% increase in funding, noting that allowances will be made to cover increased payroll costs for existing personnel for cost of living increases or other payroll increases due to contractual obligations. With no payroll increases expected except for cost of living, Mansfield said that if the Board does not expect any increases necessary in the non-salary portion of the budget (currently $1,262 for the year), a separate PB meeting with FinCom is not necessary.
List of documents on record used in the discussion of this topic (on file in PB office):
- memo to Department Heads, Boards and Commission Chairs from Finance Committee entitled “Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Process” received by PB 10/21/11.
December meeting schedule
The PB discussed changing the 12/5/11 PB meeting to another date, as the ZBA hearing for the PB’s appeal of the 389 River Rd guest house permit has been scheduled for the same time. On discussion, the PB agreed to schedule one December meeting on 12/12/11 and to cancel the previously scheduled meetings of 12/5/11 and 12/19/11
All members present this evening said they are able to attend a meeting on 12/12/11, and Mansfield agreed to contact Johnson regarding the schedule change.
Proposed Planning Board policy on noise control associated with land development construction
Chair Freedman asked Planning Administrator Mansfield about the results of his follow up with the Building Commissioner and with Rob West, agent for the Hanover Hill project, for their input on the draft Noise Control Policy proposed by the PB. Mansfield said that he has not heard back from West, and that the Building Commissioner said he had not had the chance to review the revised draft Policy.
Chair Freedman said that the BOS discussed the Noise Control Policy at its last meeting, which he joined in progress to address any questions they may have had. Chair Freedman reported that at that meeting, the Building Commissioner said he had concerns beyond those he had mentioned to the PB initially. Chair Freedman also reported that at the BOS meeting, West had read part of a prepared statement concerning the proposed policy. He asked Planning Administrator Mansfield to ask West for a copy of his prepared statement for the BOS and the Building Commissioner for the concerns he had referred to before the BOS. Their input could then be considered by the Board before the discussion at the next PB meeting (November 21st).
Vice Chair Epstein (who had viewed the BOS meeting via cable broadcast) noted that one point West had made was that he felt such a policy is not necessary. He said that there have been no noise complaints regarding the construction work at Hanover Hill, and asked why developers were being “singled out”, since once a house built and sold, there are no regulations or bylaws which address construction or non-construction noise from private home builders and residents. Freedman explained to the BOS that the infrastructure of a development under construction is within the PB’s purview while other noise producing activities are not. He added that it is part of the PB’s role to protect the residents during the development process.
Chair Freedman pointed out to the PB that positive feedback on the draft Policy has been received from the BOH and from the Police Chief. He suggested confirming that the PB will have a public meeting (not a public hearing) to gather public input from any boards and committees as well as from developers, and ideally at that meeting vote to adopt a Noise Control Policy. He proposed 7:45 pm on 11/21/11, and suggested reaching out to developers Rob West, William Costello (associated with the Greystone Crossing Conservation Cluster, and Lou Baldoumas (associated with Chestnut Estates Conservation Cluster) to inform them of the 11/21/11 discussion on the Policy, and to let other Boards and Departments know too. Chair Freedman pointed out that at the BOS meeting, one thing that seemed to come across was
some concern about doing things that may be seen as adversely affecting developers, but he noted to the PB that protecting residents is the PB and the Town’s responsibility.
Chair Freedman said that at their meeting, the BOS seemed to believe that the PB had initiated this , and he reminded them that several citizens had come to the PB and to the BOS with complaints about construction noise, and that the BOS had concluded that the issue needed to be addressed. As PB Chair, Freedman had offered to work with the BOH to address it, and the BOS had expressed agreement with that approach.
The BOS planned to consolidate their input on the draft policy and provide it to the PB before November 21st. Chair Freedman explained to the BOS that the Noise Control Policy will provide guidelines as to what the PB expects a developer to address with regard to noise control within their Construction Management Plan (CMP), which is already a component of each of the PB’s Rules and Regulations. Since the PB is not changing the Subdivision Regulations or proposing a bylaw change, a public hearing is not required. He assured the BOS that the PB is not seeking an expansion of their authority, but is taking a limited and targeted approach.
Chair Freedman suggested to the PB that Town Counsel be appraised of the PB’s approach with this Policy, including how it is an elaboration of the CMP, already a part of the Regulations and that the PB will have a public meeting discussion on November 21st. The PB agreed that the memo and draft Noise Policy will be circulated to all Boards and Committees tomorrow, and that the developers will be contacted to inform them about the meeting on the 21st, noting that they can get a copy of the draft Noise Control Policy at the PB office or at the Town Clerk’s office.
List of documents on record used in the discussion of this topic (on file in PB office):
- 10/24/11 memo from Health Agent Fantasia to the PB entitled “Draft Policy for Noise Control”
- Email from G. Mansfield to all Departments, Boards, and Committees, and residents who have expressed interest in the construction noise issue, dated 9/29/11 entitled “Planning Board Noise Control Policy” with attached draft Noise Control Policy and cover memo.
- Email from Police Chief Fisher to George Mansfield dated 10/5/11 re “Planning Board Noise Policy”.
Berry Corner Lane
Planning Administrator Mansfield confirmed that the final signature has been obtained on the Covenant and Agreement between the owners of the Lane, abutters, the PB and the applicant, and this is to be recorded (by the applicant) with the ANR plan. In accordance, the ANR which has been held by the PB office awaiting the finalization of the Covenant, can now be released to the applicant. The Covenant was a requirement of Sec. 2.7 of the Settlement and Release Agreement of May 2007 (on file in the PB office). Mansfield reported that with all outstanding PB related matters now resolved on this issue, the Berry Corner Lane matter is now closed.
At 8:45 pm, Vice Chair Epstein moved and Brown seconded the adjournment of the PB meeting. The motion was approved 6-0.
Respectfully Submitted,
Gretchen Caywood
Administrative Assistant
Carlisle Planning Board
| 
